Friday, 20 July 2007

Is McConnell Vulnerable?

McConnell's role as minority leader has brought a new set of realities. First off, he becomes one of the faces of the Republican party. That makes him a primary target for the left. It also allows them to tie him into any Republican issues that are unpopular.

We are seeing their wrath in newly released attack ads against McConnell about the Iraq war. But the attacks won't stop with paid advertisement. The media in this state want to see him go down as well and will generate stories to cast him in a negative light.

But is McConnell really vulnerable in 2008? It will be impossible to tell for sure until we find out who is running against him. But let's assume that a quality candidate can be found to run. Can they beat him?

For starters the challenger will be well funded as outside money will flood in at the opportunity to knock of McConnell. Which leads to another effect of being the minority leader. Access to donors. McConnell has used it to build up a mind boggling six million dollar war chest for the race. Which will guarantee his ability to communicate his vision with the voters and counter all attacks.

With money not being a problem for McConnell, is their any issues or outside factors that will make him vulnerable? The only issue which McConnell is vulnerable on is his support of the war in Iraq. The short attention span of the American population has turned the majority against the engagement.

It is fair to say that the war may have been the primary reason that Northup narrowly lost last year's election to Yarmuth. But in the same breath, both Lewis and Davis won competitive races in a year in which Republicans took a beating. Even in a bad year, Republicans did very well in Kentucky outside of Louisville.

On top of that, we would have to assume that nothing changes in Iraq during the next 18 months. That is probably a bad assumption. The results of the current surge will be known early next year. If it is unsuccessful, we will see the withdrawal of troops. If it is successful, then we will probably see a bounce in favor of continuing our engagement. Either way, I doubt it will be the albatross it might be in the current climate.

On every other issue, McConnell is in lock step with a majority of voters in Kentucky. Thus I am not sure that he will be overly vulnerable on the issues.

Are their any outside factors? Yes and it is a big one. The presidential race. At the moment, it looks like Hillary Clinton is a lock for the Democratic nomination. Can she win in Kentucky? Especially against say, Fred Thompson, a conservative candidate from Tennessee? I would have to say it is highly doubtful at best. Her appearance at the top of the ticket will be a burden to whoever the Democratic opponent will be. Making it easier for McConnell to win.

Of course, my assumption above is that a quality candidate will run against him. Those who have surfaced so far who want to challenge McConnell (Owen, Horne, and Stumbo) are not what I would consider quality candidates.

At the end of the day, I don't see McConnell as vulnerable. That is what most Democratic candidates of quality will see as well. They would be better served waiting two more years to take on Bunning. Who eeked out a victory three years ago against a weak opponent. He would appear to be more vulnerable than McConnell will be next year.

Posted by brians at 11:18 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)

Wednesday, 18 July 2007

Latest Survey USA Poll

The new Survey USA poll is out and it shows Beshear leading Fletcher 59-36 with 5% undecided. A single poll by itself isn't interesting. What is interesting is to see if a trend is developing. Right now we only have two polls, but Fletcher has already closed 5 points from the last survey. It will be interesting to see if this trend continues.

One thing I have wondered about Survey USA's polling is why they show a significantly larger lead than other polling organizations like Rasmussen and the Southern Political Report. So I decided to delve into the polls internals to see if I could understand the divide.

The first thing that struck me odd was the low number of undecideds (5%). Even stranger was the Gen Y group, the least politically consciences group,  had a 0% undecided rate. This is significantly lower than the undecided rates in the primary. I wonder what it is about their polling methods that lead to such a low undecided rate? I doubt this is the reason for the differences in polling, but it is strange.

More compelling evidence for the gap can be found in the gambling question. Survey USA asks those polled if there should be a state wide vote for gambling? This seems to me to be a question asking if one favors gambling or not. Why would you want a vote if you are against gambling? On this question, 79% were in favor of voting on gambling while on 18% opposed the initiative. If these numbers are to believed a gaming vote in Kentucky would win overwhelmingly. I find this a bit difficult to believe. But, heavy sampling of pro-gamblers could very well explain the size of Beshear's lead in Survey USA polls.
Posted by brians at 11:30 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)

Tuesday, 17 July 2007

Yarmuth Fails to Impress

In last year's 3rd congressional district race, two issues dominated the campaign. The war in Iraq and the bridges project. Yarmuth won the election by promising to end the war in Iraq and help secure funding for the bridges project. On top of that he promised that a Democratic controlled congress would be different. 7 months later where do we stand?

He was right that a Democratic controlled congress would be different. They are more concerned with "investigating" the Bush administration rather than doing the people's business. The do nothing congress so far has only been able to pass one major piece of legislation. Ant that was to a bill to continue funding for the war.

What about the bridges project? We need over 2 billion dollars to fund the project. Yarmuth has been able to secure a measly 1 million dollars to help with funding. That is .5% of the total cost of the project.

While he has been able to do nothing to end the war and little to help Louisville, he has been successful at lining his own pockets. So far he has been able to raise over 600,000 dollars for his next election. He appears to be more concerned with holding on to power than actually working for his constituents. But I guess that is the Democrat way.
Posted by brians at 8:47 AM in Louisville Politics
Responses (0)

Thursday, 12 July 2007

The Casino War Begins

Today began the battle for legalized gambling  the governorship as Beshear and Fletcher squared off in the first debate of the political season. Not surprisingly, most of the debate centered around legalized gambling. As the race begins to take shape, it is becoming apparent that legalized gambling is going to hold center stage for the main event.

Why? Two forces have made gambling the primary issue of the gubernatorial race. The first was Beshear's primary campaign. Everywhere he went he talked about the need for legalized gambling to generate revenue to fund all of his socialist ideas. In responding to any problem or need the state had, Beshear would almost always answer with the need for legalized gambling. On the other side of the fence, Fletcher decided to move his position. While he always opposed gambling personally, he never took a strict stand against it. He has decided to embrace his personal belief and firmly oppose gambling. In the process, he has created stark contrast between the two candidates. One that will be the defining issue of the race.

This is an absolutely brilliant move by Fletcher's team. By embracing Beshear's main selling point and diametrically opposing it, Fletcher has guaranteed legalized gambling will be the main issue of the race. Not only is this a winning issue for Fletcher, but it deflects attention from his "scandals' in office. Beshear on the other hand has backed himself into this corner. He spent his entire primary as a single note candidate. Because the Democratic primary was a mostly congenial affair, Beshear's ideas were never really challenged. Now that we have moved to the general, his central tenet for his entire campaign is being challenged and he is going to have to spend a lot of time and energy defending it. Meanwhile Fletcher can focus on his accomplishments and free market alternatives to "gambling with our future".  I know it is still early in the race, but right now Fletcher's team is running circles around Beshear. It will be interesting to see if it continues.

Posted by brians at 10:12 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (1)

Tuesday, 10 July 2007

Strategic Error By Democrats

When I first heard about the special session, I didn't think much of it. We have had plenty of special sessions over the years and none of them covered anything that even remotely resembled an "emergency". Most are over stuff that didn't get through during the regular session but are time sensitive. The coal to gas plant from Peabody was an issue that definitely is time sensitive. And if you are going to be in session you might as well get a couple of other things done while you are there.  So at the end of the day this special session didn't seem any different from any other special session we have had. Except that this one is occurring during a Gubernatorial election.

Well, the Democrats and their willing accomplices in the media freaked out over this session. They claimed it is a massive waste of taxpayer money. That the agenda will take months to complete. They continualy whine that this is a political stunt by Fletcher to save his campaign.

Initially, I was puzzled by the Democratic leadership's vitriolic response to the call for a special session. Why make this a big issue? Beshear has a huge lead in the polls. If they had just accepted it and gotten it over with quickly, what would Fletcher have really gained? A minor victory months before the election. I doubt anyone would have remembered it come election day.

So why make this a big issue? Maybe they didn't want to look bad for their failure to resolve these issues during the regular session. (The sad thing is this special session wouldn't have been necessary had the legislators done their job in the first place) The whole thing didn't make sense to me.

Of course today brought the reason for their panic into focus. They are scared to death of losing this fall. This is THE election for them. If they lose to what they believe is a damaged Republican they will have no chance of winning again in the foreseeable future. They know they have a weak candidate. First, Behsear represents the good ole boy system of past and they don't want to have to defend it. More importantly, Beshear is a single issue candidate. Go back and look at the primary. Every answer on every issue was we need expanded gambling. Those answers will look shallow and ill informed against Fletcher's command of the issues. On top of that, his single issue, expanded gambling is not all that popular in the state. It is this fear which has driven many of them to contract the Fletcher Derangement Syndrome.

Today's gubernatorial poll shows that they have a valid reason for their fear. The gap between Beshear and Fletcher has closed from 20+ points to 3. To some extent these results are not all that suprising. I noted that when Beshear had the enormous lead he had an inordinate amount of Republican support. Mostly due to polling taking place immediately after a bitter and divisive Republican primary. Combine the division with Beshear's weakness as a candidate and the polling numbers were bound to get closer. With polls tightening the Democrats paniced. They needed some way to try to throw egg on the face of the governor and grasped at their first opportunity, the special session.

Their decision to torpedo the special session I believe will turn out to be a monstrous tactical error on their part. First of all, they ran away like a bunch of petulant children. Leaving no doubt that the whole thing was a political stunt. On top of that, they have put themselves on the opposite side of job creation and projects that would benefit their constituents. Of course the Republicans called them (literally and figuratively) on this very point, and now they are pissed at the Republicans. What did they expect Republicans to do? Sit back and take it? Do the Democrats really believe the voters are going to buy their rhetoric on this issue? Most importantly, the Dems decision to act partisan has rallied the fractured Republican base around the governor. Instead of facing a divided Republican party, they are now facing a united and renergized party this fall.

The problem is only going to get worse for the Democrats. They are stuck. They are now in the position where they can't vote for anything in this special session without validating its necessity. Thus we see Richards out today saying the house will not reconvene in 20 days. Not only that, but all of their arguments against the session are starting to unravel. The need for Peabody incentives is real. The senate got many of the issues passed in a couple of days with mostly bipartisan support. As time goes on it will be the Democrats who appear to be the ones wasting taxpayer money. In addition, they will found in violation of the state constitution.

Beshear is stuck with it as well because he endorsed the whole sham. Fletcher will undoubtely beat him over the head with this issue repeatedly throughout the campaign.

At the end of the day, the policy of cut and run will turn out to be a disaster for the Democrats. It was poorly thought out and clumsily executed. And it has allowed the Republicans to regain the momentum heading into the fall elections.


Posted by brians at 11:44 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)

Monday, 9 July 2007

Yarmuth wants us to enjoy Socialized Medicine

Last Friday, I just happened to be listening to the Francine show on WHAS radio and heard the end of a conversation she had with Congressman Yarmuth. In that little bit, I was flabbergasted. Yarmuth was praising Michael Moore's new movie "Sicko". He then when on to promote the need for socialized medicine in the United States.

For those who don't know, Michael Moore's movie is about the greatness of socialized health care. One of the films major canards is its chastisement of  America for not having as good a health care system as Cuba.

I guess that means that Yarmuth wants us to enjoy the same wonderful health care that the Cubans enjoy. He must wants us to have the same "world class" facilities the Cubans have below.


 




Is this really the health care system you want? No? I didn't think so. Go see "Sicko" if you want to know what type of health care the wealthy and elite political class (ie Congressman Yarmuth) will enjoy. If you want to know what health care will be like for the rest of us check out the real cuba and then go stand in a long line somewhere.

Posted by brians at 11:17 PM in Louisville Politics
Responses (0)

Saturday, 7 July 2007

If I were...

If I were on the board of Peabody energy would I feel comfortable with a "letter" saying that incentives will be passed at a future date? Especially knowing that government can change its mind on a whim. I only have to look at the bingo halls, bars, and restaurants in Louisville who spent over $30,000 to install new ventilation systems. All on the promise that the metro council wouldn't ban smoking in their establishments. Only to have the council change its mind shortly afterwards. No I wouldn't have many warm fuzzies over a "letter".

How comfortable would I be with a legislature that cares more about its own intrigues rather than the well being of its citizens? If it cares so little about its citizens, how would it treat its corporate citizens?

The "letter" Richards keeps talking about mentions passing incentives in the future. What are those incentives going to be if my company selected Kentucky? Without guaranteed numbers, I have no way to create a cost - benefit analysis of the investment. I would be taking a huge leap of faith with my own money and the money of others who entrusted that responsibility to me.

Would you gamble with your investment money in this situation? I didn't think so. And neither would I. If I were a member of the board, I would have to vote to go elsewhere. I suspect that is what Peabody will do when they decide later this summer. Richards, Beshear, and the rest of the Democrats are wrong on this one and I hope they and their party are ready for the fall out when Peabody passes over Kentucky.

Posted by brians at 11:33 AM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)

Friday, 6 July 2007

Democrats Childish Ways

During the last legislative session, Jody Richards whined about not wanting to address the retirement problem state government faces. Instead of working with the Senate, he ended up acting like a two year old when he declared if the senate won't pass my bill then I won't pass their bill. And he picked up his ball and went home.

Yesterday, Richards outdid his previous temper tantrum. In a most juvenile act, he held a vote to adjourn the session without doing anything. Rather than deal with the issues of the state, he is once again picking up his ball and going home. Except he didn't go directly home. No, first he and his fellow Democrats stopped by Steve Beshear's meet and greet reception. Where I am sure they congratulated themselves on being masters of the universe. Although I doubt they could even be masters of the playground. Heck, my 11 year old niece acts more grown up than these clowns.

Posted by brians at 9:07 AM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)

Thursday, 5 July 2007

Liberals Tipping Point

Liberals are interesting creatures. They have never seen a tax increase they didn't like. They have never seen a government program they didn't like. The more government can encroach in peoples lives the better we are for it they preach. I have always wondered if there was a tipping point. A point where one tax was too much or one government initiative went to far. Well it appears I have found that point. It happens when a Republican makes a call for government action. Only then is it a "waste of taxpayer money" and an "attempt to play politics". What a joke. The hypocrisy from these clowns is contemptable at best.
Posted by brians at 11:08 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)

Wednesday, 4 July 2007

Happy 4th of July

Happy 231st Birthday America! 
Posted by brians at 9:00 AM in Announcements
Responses (0)

Tuesday, 3 July 2007

Clouds are Gathering in Frankfort

Fletcher called a special session today. The primary purpose or which is to generate tax incentives in hopes of luring companies to Kentucky that want to convert coal to diesel fuel.

Fletcher said the primary purpose of the session is to pass tax incentives to attract to the state companies that would convert coal to diesel fuel.

Among other things, the bill would allow eligible firms to recoup up to 80 percent of the severance tax paid on Kentucky coal used at the plant and would give them a break on sales taxes paid on construction material.

Four firms wrote letters to the governor stating that the incentives are crucial for Kentucky to compete with other coal-producing states to attract the projects.

One company, Peabody Energy, of St. Louis, wants to build a $3billion plant outside Sturgis, in Union County, that would produce up to 30,000 barrels of liquid fuel per day.

Unfortunately in today's world, states competing for jobs has become the norm and not the exception. If states want to grow their economies and provide jobs for its citizens they must compete. I hate the fact that large companies get these nice tax breaks that small companies aren't afforded. It would be nice if states treated small companies with the same amount of reverence as the big guys. Regretably, this isn't the reality. A state's resources are limited and it makes sense for them to go after a big company who will invest $3 billion dollars than 3,000 smaller companies.

Given this economic reality, I don't have a problem with the special session. If we can lure that size of investment, it is worth the few hundred thousand that we spend on a special session. It shouldn't take more than a couple of weeks to get the incentive plan drafted and through both legislative bodies. I like what Fletcher did with the special session. Rather than waste tax payers money spending a couple of weeks only addressing this issue, he decided to add a few other items to the agenda to maximize the legislatures effectiveness during these couple of weeks.

Issues like the spending measures that were previously vetoed by Fletcher, income tax break for veterans, and fixing the mess that Stumbo made of the domestic partner issue are items the state legislature could easily address during those couple of weeks.

Of course the Democrats are up an arms over the extended agenda. They argue that it will takes months to get all of this done. If you address one issue at a time it might take that long. I guess they haven't heard of little thing called multitasking. While they are there, the legislature might as well try to get some of these other things done. They already passed these projects once. How hard is it to send it back through. The only controversial issue is the domestic partners benefit. We wouldn't have to address it now if Stumbo hadn't made a mess of the whole situation with his ridiculous ruling a few weeks back.

The problem for Fletcher is the Democrats aren't serious about these issues and are going to play politics with the whole thing. They have already tipped their hands to this fact.

House Speaker Jody Richards, D-Bowling Green, said that one option will be to adjourn the House immediately.

Under the Kentucky Constitution, the members would have to return in three days if the Senate also did not decide to adjourn.

Another possibility, Richards said, is to convene hearings on alleged bid rigging in the Transportation Cabinet as a result of recently released testimony from former state Highway Engineer Sam Beverage.

"There are several options, and that would be one of them," he said. "We would be seeking the truth. ... There's just so many questions about the Transportation Cabinet and all the scandals over there, and we would just like to see what's going on."

Richards said he plans to discuss strategy with other House leaders Thursday morning.

Way to plan the best way to waste tax payer money! All in the hopes of making the governor look bad. I about spit out my drink when I read Moberl's quote.

Moberly said a soft economy and a surplus smaller than anticipated — most recently estimated at $216million for this fiscal year, down $63million from previous forecasts — are two reasons to hold off on approving new projects.

"I think most of these projects ought to wait until 2008 and be prioritized," he said.

Soft economy? Smaller surplus? Didn't you pass these projects when we had massive deficits? Reprioritize? I thought all of the projects were important when they were vetoed in the first place? What has changed between then and now? Oh yeah, that's right, this is the campaign season. We can't do anything sensible during an election. Instead, the Democrats would rather waste tax payer money rather than doing the right thing. It will undoubtedly be a stormy session.

Posted by brians at 6:43 PM in Kentucky Politics
Responses (0)